Restaurant Servicescape, Service Encounter

This article was downloaded by: [80.42.92.22]On: 12 May 2013, At: 10:31Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Hospitality Marketing &ManagementPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/whmm20

Restaurant Servicescape, ServiceEncounter, and Perceived Congruency onCustomers' Emotions and SatisfactionIngrid Y. Lin a & Anna S. Mattila ba School of Travel Industry Management, University of Hawaii atManoa, Honolulu, Hawaii, USAb School of Hospitality Management, The Pennsylvania StateUniversity, University Park, Pennsylvania, USAPublished online: 15 Oct 2010.

To cite this article: Ingrid Y. Lin & Anna S. Mattila (2010): Restaurant Servicescape, ServiceEncounter, and Perceived Congruency on Customers' Emotions and Satisfaction, Journal of HospitalityMarketing & Management, 19:8, 819-841

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2010.514547

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/whmm20

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2010.514547

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 19:819–841, 2010Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1936-8623 print/1936-8631 onlineDOI: 10.1080/19368623.2010.514547

Restaurant Servicescape, Service Encounter,and Perceived Congruency on Customers’

Emotions and Satisfaction

INGRID Y. LINSchool of Travel Industry Management, University of Hawaii at Manoa,

Honolulu, Hawaii, USA

ANNA S. MATTILASchool of Hospitality Management, The Pennsylvania State University,

University Park, Pennsylvania, USA

This study examines the relative impact of physical surroundingsand customer-employee interactions on customers’ emotions andsatisfaction. A field study was conducted in an actual restaurantsetting. Subjects were interviewed at the end of the meal and askedto complete a survey instrument. Results indicate that both theservicescape and the service encounter influence pleasure and sat-isfaction. In addition, perceived congruency (i.e., matching therestaurant theme with food served, and matching the exterior lookwith the interior décor) had a positive impact on pleasure level, whilesuch impact on arousal was minimal. Further, perceived congru-ency and pleasure had a joint impact on satisfaction. Managerialand future research implications are reported and discussed.

KEYWORDS Arousal, pleasure, satisfaction, service encounter,servicescape

INTRODUCTION

In order to be successful, restaurant operators need to create a pleasantservicescape and provide excellent service to their customers. The ser-vicescape is the physical environment of a service organization where the

Address correspondence to Ingrid Y. Lin, PhD, School of Travel Industry Management,University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2560 Campus Rd., George Hall 220, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA.E-mail: [email protected]

819

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3

820 I. Y. Lin and A. S. Mattila

service transaction occurs; it is composed of numerous elements such asthe color, music, scent, and layout and design in a physical environment(Bitner, 1992). There is ample evidence to suggest that the servicescape hasa strong impact on consumption experiences (e.g., Kotler, 1973; Reimer &Kuehn, 2005; Bitner, 1992). Similarly, most services are characterized by ser-vice encounters; that is, the interaction between service staff and customersthroughout the entire service process. Hence, customers evaluate serviceconsumption experiences in a holistic manner, by paying attention to boththe servicescape and employee interactions.

In this field study, we address the need for a deeper understanding ofthe relative impact of the servicescape (e.g., lighting, temperature, color ofthe wall, color of the floor, music, theme, comfort level, and the uniquenessof the interior layout and design) and service encounters (i.e., the inter-action between customers and service staff) on customers’ emotions andsatisfaction in a restaurant setting. Conducting the present research in thisparticular setting would help enrich and advance the servicescape studies incustomers’ reactions and evaluations of a restaurant while applying the con-cept of Gestalt. The vast majority of prior studies have focused on pleasantenvironments; for a notable exception see Namasivayam and Mattila (2007)who examined both positively and negatively valenced servicescapes. Whilemany previous studies were also conducted in an actual restaurant setting(Jang & Namkung, 2009; Kivela, Inbakaran, & Reece, 2000); the uniquenessof this research is that the notion of Gestalt was adopted, and the interac-tive effects of perceived congruency and individuals’ pleasure or arousal onsatisfaction were being tested.

There is strong evidence in environmental psychology to suggest thathuman interactions (e.g., service encounters) are an integral part of thephysical environment, yet this notion has been largely ignored in con-sumer behavior literature (Tombs & McColl-Kennedy, 2003). This study isto explore the congruency effects between two sets of factors (the storeatmosphere and the type of food served, and the exterior look and the inte-rior décor) and their potential impact on consumer emotions (e.g., pleasureand arousal). Finally, we want to examine the interactive effects of perceivedcongruency and emotions on satisfaction.

The research models that serve as the basis for this study are depictedin Figures 1 and 2. Support for the research hypotheses is derived primar-ily from the services marketing (e.g., servicescape and atmospherics) andpsychology literature. Several other research streams are also reviewed.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Stimulus-Organism-Response Model (S-O-R)

The S-O-R model helps explain and frame the link between the servicescape,emotions, and satisfaction. S-O-R has been adopted in many research studies

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3

Restaurant Servicescape, Service Encounter, and Perceived Congruency 821

ServicescapeService Encounter

Pleasure

Arousal

PerceivedCongruency

(PC)

H1

H2

H4

H5

FIGURE 1 Model for H1, H2, H4, and H5.

PC × Pleasure

Satisfaction

PC × Arousal

ServicescapeService Encounter

PleasureArousal H3

H6

H7

FIGURE 2 Model for H3, H6, and H7.

in the fields of psychology and marketing. According to the S-O-R, S (theenvironmental stimuli) influences O (individuals’ processing of environmen-tal cues received and individuals’ responses—emotional states: pleasure,arousal, and dominance), and individual’s emotions then drive individuals todifferent R (responses or behaviors such as approach or avoidance behav-iors; Mehrabian & Russell, 1974; Donovan & Rossiter, 1982; Namasivayam &Mattila, 2007; Jang & Namkung, 2009).

Adopting the S-O-R, this study examined the following stimuli: thecombined components of a restaurant’s servicescape cues that are alreadyestablished (e.g., green-colored walls, traditional Japanese backgroundmusic, etc.) and the service interactions that customers encounter with theservice staff during the service delivery process. At the organism level, the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


interactive effects of customers’ pleasure and arousal, and finally, customers’response of satisfaction are investigated. Various theorists agree that the linkbetween stimulus and response is persistent and relatively stable (Kassarjian& Robertson, 1981). Any stimulus may become a drive if it reaches sufficientintensity (Kassarjian & Robertson, 1981). In many service settings such asrestaurants and bars, servicescape cues serve as environmental stimuli thatinfluence customers’ responses.

The Gestalt Concept

The purpose of introducing the Gestalt, or holistic approach is to supportthe argument that an individual’s satisfaction upon entering a servicescapeis not based on a single stimulus. The concept of Gestalt bases itself onassumptions about how living organisms relate to their environment (Carmer& Rouzer, 1974). Applying the concept of Gestalt, this study suggests thatpeople generally receive a variety of stimuli from a restaurant servicescape.However, based on their needs, they organize them cognitively into groupsand derive holistic images from the stimuli (Schiffman & Kanuk, 1978). Theseholistic images serve to satisfy customer needs. The concept of “whole-configuration” is especially applicable when evaluating the overall restaurantand the customers’ dining experiences. In general, consumers view everyservice encounter holistically and take into account multiple aspects in theirsatisfaction evaluations. Accordingly, in this study customers are assumed toconsider jointly multiple atmospheric cues (e.g., color, music, layout, anddesign, etc.) and tangible products (e.g., food) and services (e.g., customer-employee interactions). This approach extends our knowledge, as previousstudies have been limited to manipulating only several environmental cuesin a given experiment.

Emotions: Pleasure and Arousal on Satisfaction

Emotion is inherent in each individual. Emotions produce an individual’sphysiological, subjective, and behavioral response (Weiss, 2002). Cognitiveand affective processing constitutes an individual’s emotional notions.Mehrabian and Russell (1974) note that three dimensions: pleasure, arousal,and dominance, characterize an individual’s feelings. Dominance is notincluded in the present study because it does not appear to influenceconsumer behaviors in commercial settings (Donovan & Rossiter, 1982).Pleasure refers to the hedonic quality of stimuli (Feldman, 1995; Dube &Morin, 2001) and it is characterized as extending along a single dimen-sion from extreme displeasure to extreme pleasure (Mehrabian & Russell,1974). The valence of the stimuli can be influenced by environmentalattributes such as color (Bellizzi & Hite, 1992; Lin, 2010a), scent (Bone &Jantrania, 1992; Bone & Ellen, 1999), and music (Mattila & Wirtz, 2001; Lin,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


2010b), as well as the service encounter (Mattila & Enz, 2002). Pleasureis used as indicator of valence in this study because it has received themost attention in examining consumption-related affect (Michleit & Eroglu,2000).

Arousal is another dimension of emotions used in the present study.Arousal is a basic, subjective state that an individual maybe in, ranging fromsleep to frantic excitement (Berlyne, 1960). The impact of arousal on individ-uals’ evaluation and behavior depends on time, place, and situation (Berlyne1960, 1967). An individual’s arousal level is often manifested in a physiolog-ical response (e.g., tension), when changes in the nervous system and in therest of the body become cyclical (Berlyne, 1971). The response is modulatedby stimulus factors (Ohman, Hamm, & Hugdahl, 2000).

Emotions serve as a guide to individuals’ satisfaction (Wirtz, Mattila,& Tan, 2000), behaviors (Larsen, Diener, & Lucas, 2002), decision-making(Damasio, 1994), and subjective well-being (Frijda, 1999). In this study it isassumed that environmental features of a servicescape and the interactionbetween the service staff and customers affect individuals, causing spe-cific Gestalt formations (e.g., perceived congruency) and affective responses(e.g., pleasure and arousal). The affective state then guides the individual toundertake a specific cognitive evaluation of his or her overall dining expe-rience at the restaurant. Finally, individuals’ cognition of forming a Gestaltor non-Gestalt judgment, affect, and cognition directed from the affect thenserve as antecedents to their behaviors (e.g., satisfaction).

The topics of servicescape and service encounter have been widelystudied in the services literature (Mattila & Enz, 2002; Jang & Namkung,2009). However, the two topics have been studied mainly in isolation (Fornotable exceptions, see Wakefield & Blodgett 1999; Namasivayam & Mattila,2007). A service product encompasses both the servicescape elements andservice encounters. According to the notion of Gestalt (e.g., Morin, Dube,& Chebat, 2007), both of these components should be viewed holistically.To that end, this study examines the joint effects of servicescape cues andservice encounter factors that make up the service experience in a restaurantsetting.

Service Encounter

Service providers have the ability to satisfy or dissatisfy customers.Customers usually start evaluating their dining experience at a restaurantas soon as they interact with the servicescape and with the service staffof the restaurant. Service encounter, also referred to as “moment of truth,”can be defined as any interaction that the customer may have with theservice organization (i.e., service staff, other customers consuming in theorganization, and servicescape) throughout his or her entire experience atthe restaurant (Fitzsimmons & Fitzsimmons, 2008). At any given moment

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


of truth, customers begin to assess their satisfaction level with the serviceprovider; hence, the concept of service quality is also strongly affiliated withservice encounter and servicescape encounter. Service quality can be definedas customers expecting perfection of services from service organizations.Competitive service organizations will try to adopt various recovery systemsto help achieve zero defects and reduce failures to enhance positive serviceencounter.

Service encounter also has been strongly emphasized both in aca-demic research and the practical domain (Mattila & Enz, 2002; Fox, 2001;Hennig-Thurau, Groth, Paul, & Gremler, 2006; Keillor, Lewison, Tomas, Hult,& Hause, 2007). The behaviors of frontline service providers are crucialto customer evaluations of a service (e.g., Hartline, Maxham, & McKee,2000; Gwinner, Bitner, Brown, & Kumar, 2005). Hence, it is not surpris-ing that the quality of the service encounter is a key strategic weapon intoday’s often-crowded marketplace (e.g., Kelley, 1992; Mittal & Lassar, 1996;Fitzsimmons & Fitzsimmons, 2008). There is a great deal of literature focus-ing on the benefits of providing good service to customers (Price, Arnould,& Deibler, 1995; Wakefield & Blodgett, 1999) and on employee trainingaimed at increasing employee motivation, performance, and productivity(e.g., Bitner, 1990; Bitner, 1992). With the rapid growth of the service sector,consumers are becoming progressively more sophisticated in their evalu-ations of service consumption experiences. Accordingly, service providersare paying increasing attention to the physical environment—also namedthe servicescape—and its impact on overall service quality (Bitner, 1992;Reimer & Kuehn, 2005).

Servicescape

Several servicescape studies have found that specific atmospheric attributeshave a direct effect on customers’ emotions and satisfaction (Mehrabian &Russell, 1974; Bitner, 1992; Turley & Milliman, 2009; Lin, 2010a), and onemployee behaviors (Parish, Berry, & Lam, 2008). The S-O-R paradigm isa model that has been used often, particularly in retail settings, to exam-ine the effects of the store atmosphere on shopping behavior (Donovan &Rossiter, 1982; Mehrabian & Russell, 1974; Mattila & Wirtz, 2001). For exam-ple, researchers have examined the impact of scent, color, and backgroundmusic on individuals’ affective states (Dube & Morin, 2001), satisfaction(Wirtz et al., 2000; Michleit & Mantel, 2001; Lin, 2010), and behaviors suchas approach or avoidance (Mehrabian & Russell, 1974; Mattila & Wirtz,2001; Milliman, 1986; Bellizzi & Hite, 1992). Specifically, pleasure has beenshown to drive satisfaction directly, and arousal acts as an amplifier of thepleasure-behavior or pleasure-satisfaction relationship (e.g., Mehrabian &Russell 1974; Donovan & Rossiter 1982; Wirtz & Mattila, 2000; Wirtz, Mattila,& Tan, 2007; Lin, 2010a).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


Previous studies linking the effect of servicescape to customer emo-tions and satisfaction have been conducted mainly in a laboratory setting(Mehrabian & Russell, 1974; Turley & Milliman, 2000; Lin, 2010b). To fur-ther generalize and validate these prior findings, it is important to test theseeffects in a real-life setting (Kerlinger & Lee, 2000). In sum, a service con-sumption experience and evaluation is a product of both service encounterand servicescape components. Service organizations that provide the mostappropriate combination of the two are most likely to achieve competi-tive success. Based on the arguments above, we put forth the followinghypotheses:

H1: Servicescape and service encounter are positively related to pleasure.

H2: Servicescape and service encounter are positively related to arousal.

H3: Servicescape, service encounter, pleasure, and arousal are positivelyrelated to satisfaction.

As previously mentioned, past studies have isolated the effects of envi-ronmental stimuli such as music, color, or scent on customer satisfaction andapproach-avoidance behaviors, but have failed to examine how these stimulimight interact with the overall atmosphere of the service setting. To furtherour understanding of such congruency effects, we rely on the notion ofGestalt perceptions. When customers respond to service settings, it is thetotal or holistic configuration of stimuli that determines their responses tothe environment (e.g., Holahan, 1982; Lin, 2004; Oakes & North, 2008; Lin,2010b). Since consumers expect the physical environment to fit the productor the service, satisfaction with a consumption experience is partially deter-mined by the perception of overall “goodness of fit” (e.g., Mattila & Wirtz,2001). For example, Morrison and Beverland (2003) show that backgroundmusic needs to match the environment in order to enhance the company’sor brand’s positioning in the market place. In a similar vein, Mattila andWirtz (2006) demonstrate that the service environment’s actual arousal levelneeds to be congruent with prior expectations.

Oakes (2007) suggests that relevancy and expectancy are the two keydimensions in congruency effects in the context of advertising. Relevancyreflects the degree to which stimuli either evaluating the fit between musicand the advertised product. Relevancy in that context helps consumers toderive meaning, while expectancy reflects how well the stimuli fit con-sumers’ prior knowledge structures. Finally, prior research has shown thatscents that are incongruent with a product lead to negative product eval-uations (e.g., Bone & Jantrania, 1992). Based on the previous arguments,we propose that in the present study, the perceived congruency, or therelevancy and expectancy, represents whether the parameters “the interior

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


servicescape matches the core product served (e.g., udon noodle soup)” and“the exterior look of the restaurant is consistent with the theme of the interiordécor of the restaurant,” will have a positive impact on customers’ emotions(e.g., pleasure and arousal). Specifically, we propose the following:

H4: Perceived congruency is positively related to pleasure.

H5: Perceived congruency is positively related to arousal.

H6 : The interactive effect of Perceived congruency and pleasure ispositively related to satisfaction.

H7 : The interactive effect of Perceived congruency and arousal ispositively related to satisfaction.

METHODOLOGY

Study Context and Procedures

The context for this study was a Japanese restaurant specializing in udonnoodles. It is considered a full-service, casual-dining, inexpensive, family-oriented restaurant. The restaurant has a very unique décor. The interiorwalls of the restaurant are bright green and yellow with red columns andit has a brown ceiling. As such, the overall look of the restaurant does notspecifically convey a Japanese theme; however, the lantern light fixturesand the old antique furniture utilized helped create the feel of an Asianrestaurant. The exterior look of the restaurant is shabby, not well lit, and hasno signs. Most people would not know that it’s a Japanese noodle shop justby looking at the exterior of the restaurant.

The restaurant employs six servers (full-time and part-time) and twochefs. There are approximately 60 seats in the restaurant. The restaurant’sprimary target markets include locals and families. The restaurant does nothave a prime location in Taichung, Taiwan. However, it is convenientlylocated across the street from a prestigious university. Through word-of-mouth and their unique homemade noodles, the restaurant is able to attractlocals (e.g., families), university faculty, staff, and students. The restaurantoffers a limited selection of items (i.e., cold udon or hot udon noodlesoups). Each dish is priced between US$8.00 to US$10.00 depending onthe composition of ingredients in the soup.

Data Collection

The primary researcher of this study and two research assistants were on-siteto collect data for a period of seven days. The time period covered both peak

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


(lunch and dinner) and nonpeak hours. Having finished taking the order, theservers asked the customers if they were interested in participating in thisstudy. If the customer agreed, a member of the research team approachedthe customer right after they finished ordering their meal to ask a few open-ended questions. For example: (a) Have you ever dined at this restaurantbefore?; (b) How did you know or hear about this restaurant?; and (c) Howoften do you dine out? After these brief questions, the researcher thankedthe participants for their willingness to participate in the study and informedthem that at the end of their meal, they would be asked to complete a surveyinstrument. When the server collected their noodle bowls, the researcherthen distributed the survey instrument to the customers. Upon completionof the survey, the researcher went and collected the survey instrument. Whilethanking the customer again for their participation, the researcher asked afew more questions relating to their overall dining experience (e.g., Did youenjoy your meal? Would you come back to dine at this restaurant again?How did you like the overall atmosphere of this restaurant? What will youremember most about this restaurant when you leave the restaurant today?).The researcher then asked the server to bring out a complementary dessertas a token of appreciation.

A total of 508 customers agreed to participate in the study, but 30 sur-veys were excluded from the data analysis due to missing data. Table 1presents the characteristics of the participants in this study. There were 183males and 295 females along with a notable representation of high education(53.1% with a college degree and 21.8% with a postgraduate degree). Morethan 50% of participants were single and 37.2% were married. Most of theparticipants fall in the age bracket of 20 to 49. For more detail informationregarding the participants’ demographics, please see Table 1.

Measures

All scales were measured using a 7-point Likert-type scale anchored at 1(strongly disagree) and 7 (strongly agree). The following dependent vari-ables were employed: servicescape (modified from Hightower, Brady, &Baker, 2002), service encounter (adapted from Price, Arnould, & Deibler,1995), perceived congruency (defined as: [a] The fact that the food servedin this restaurant matches the décor of the restaurant induces me to dine atthis restaurant more often than in other restaurants, and [b] the exterior lookof this restaurant matches the interior décor or theme), pleasure or arousal(adapted from Mehrabian & Russell [1974] with six items measuring pleasureand six items measuring arousal), satisfaction (scales for satisfaction wereadapted from Hightower et al., 2002, 5-item scales; see Appendix). The sur-veys were translated from English to Chinese and were then retranslated toEnglish (Brislin, Lonner, & Thorndike, 1973; Hambleton, 1993). To ensureitem equivalence, attention was paid to how well the items in the survey

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


TABLE 1 Characteristics of Participants

Frequency % Valid %

GenderMale 183 38 38Female 295 62 62Total 478

AgeUp to 19 49 10.3 11.120–29 154 32.2 34.930–39 155 32.4 35.140–49 73 15.3 16.650–59 9 1.9 2.0Over 60 1 0.2 0.2Total 441 92.3 100Missing 37 7.7 MissingTotal with missing 478

Marital statusSingle 246 51.5 56.3Married 178 37.2 40.0Other 16 3.3 3.7Total 440 92.1 100Missing 38 7.9 MissingTotal with missing 478

EducationHigh school 82 17.1 18.7College 254 53.1 57.7Post graduate 104 21.8 23.6Total 440 92.1 100Missing 38 7.9 MissingTotal with missing 478

OccupationAgriculture 3 0.6 0.7Engineering and technology 32 6.7 7.2Business 77 16.1 17.4Education 108 22.6 24.4Student 108 22.6 24.4Other 114 23.8 25.8Total 442 92.5 100Missing 36 7.5 MissingTotal with missing 478

Monthly income (in NT$)Under 10,000 100 20.9 24.310,001–20,000 30 6.3 7.320,001–30,000 50 10.5 12.230,001–40,000 59 12.3 14.440,001–50,000 49 10.3 11.950,001–60,000 34 7.1 8.3Over 60,001 89 18.6 21.7Total 411 86.0 100Missing 67 14.0 MissingTotal with missing 478

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


instrument fitted the Chinese language. The translation of items from Englishto Chinese and the final wording of the Chinese instrument were performedby university language instructors who are proficient in both languages.The quantitative data collected were then analyzed via SPSS software usingfactor analysis and linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

Participants’ Qualitative Responses from the Interview

Many customers that we interviewed considered themselves regulars. Someof them indicated having built a strong relationship with the owners of therestaurant. Many customers said that they dine at the restaurant not onlyfor the unique homemade udon noodle soup, but also for the convenienceand family-oriented, cozy experience that the restaurant provides. When weasked the participants to explain what they considered most memorable tothem when dining at this particular restaurant, nearly all participants men-tioned the food itself. Interestingly, about 70% of participants also mentionedthe wall colors. They commented that it is unusual to see bright grass greenand yellow walls in restaurant settings, and they also admitted that theyweren’t sure what style or theme the restaurant is trying to portray. Yet, sucha unique atmosphere helped them remember this restaurant.

Quantitative Data Analysis

Based on the quantitative data collected, Table 2 summarizes factor load-ings from an exploratory factor analysis with a varimax rotation. We firstconducted an exploratory principal components factor analysis to assessthe underlying factor structure of our scale items. The six factors explained87.98% of total variance.

As a preliminary test, the Pearson Correlation values were reviewedbetween independent and dependant variables. Table 3 summarizes descrip-tive statistics, correlations, and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’salpha). Cronbach’s alphas for variables were well above the acceptable levelof 0.7 (Nunnally, 1978).

To test hypotheses H1 to H7, a linear regression analysis was usedand the results are shown in Tables 4 to 7. Table 4 shows the impact ofservicescape and service encounter on emotional responses (i.e., pleasureand arousal). H1 is supported in that servicescape (standardized beta = .35,t = 7.36, p < .001) and service encounter (standardized beta = .35, t = 7.32,p < .001) both enhance individual’s pleasure level; together, they accountfor 38% of customers’ pleasure level. On the other hand, H2 is only partiallysupported in that only servicescape (standardized beta = .12, t = 1.93,p < .05) is positively linked to arousal.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


TABLE 2 Factor Analysis and Loading Matrix

Factor(s)/ % of % ofVariable Cronbach’s variance totalname 1 2 3 4 5 6 α explained variance

Serviceencounter

.95 30.25

1 .822 .813 .804 .805 .796 .797 .798 .779 .74

10 .60Servicescape .93 19.50

1 .782 .743 .734 .715 .707 .708 .70

10 .7011 .696 .679 .64

Pleasure .94 11.205 .853 .844 .822 .796 .771 .59

Arousal .76 8.423 .784 .746 .712 .671 .60

Satisfaction .91 12.112 .743 .784 .76

Perceivedcongruency

.70 6.50

1 .722 .60

87.98

Note. Servicescape Items 12 and 13, Arousal Item 5, and Satisfaction Items 1 and 5 with loadings of 0.50and lower were omitted. The items were reduced to the above seven-factor solution with eigenvaluesgreater than 1. The total variance extracted was 87.98%.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3

TAB

LE3

Des

crip

tive

Stat

istic

softh

eConst

ruct

s

Var

iable

MSD

Cro

nbac

h’s

α1

23

45

67

89

1.Se

rvic

esca

pe

5.43

.86

.93

1.00

2.Se

rvic

eEnco

unte

r5.

72.9

3.9

5.6

2∗∗1.

003.

Satis

fact

ion

5.90

1.06

.91

.49∗∗

.45∗∗

1.00

4.Ple

asure

5.07

.78

.94

.58∗∗

.55∗∗

.72∗∗

1.00

5.A

rousa

l4.

091.

02.7

6.0

2−.

03.0

9.0

91.

006.

Per

ceiv

edCongr

uen

cy5.

061.

06.6

9.7

1∗∗.5

1∗∗.3

4∗∗.4

4∗∗.0

31.

007.

Per

ceiv

edCongr

uen

cy×

Aro

usa

l20

.73

6.60

.28∗∗

.23∗∗

.41∗∗

.54∗∗

.88∗∗

.23∗∗

1.00

8.Per

ceiv

edCongr

uen

cy×

Ple

asure

26.0

07.

87.7

8∗∗.6

2∗∗.5

7∗∗.7

8∗∗.0

6.9

0∗∗.4

1∗∗1.

009.

Per

ceiv

edCongr

uen

cy×

Aro

usa

l20

.74

7.21

.45∗∗

.30∗∗

.27∗∗

.33∗∗

.79∗∗

.62∗∗

.82∗∗

.58∗∗

1.00

Not

e.N

=47

8.∗ p

<.0

5.∗∗

p<

.01.

831

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


TABLE 4 Summary of Regression Analysis for Servicescape and Service Encounter PredictingPleasure (N = 478) and Arousal (N = 420)

Pleasure Arousal

Variable B SE B β B SE B β

Servicescape 0.31 0.04 .35∗∗ 0.14 0.07 .12Service Encounter 0.29 0.04 .35∗∗ −0.11 0.06 −.10

Note. R2= .38, F(2, 475) = 130.55∗∗ for predicting Pleasure; R2 = .01, F(2, 475) = 2.11 for predictingArousal.∗∗p < .01.

TABLE 5 Summary of Regression Analysis for VariablesPredicting Satisfaction (N = 478)

Variable B SE B β

Servicescape 0.09 0.05 .08∗

Service Encounter 0.08 0.05 .07∗

Pleasure 0.84 0.06 .61∗∗

Arousal 0.04 0.04 .03

Note. R2 = .50, F(4, 473) = 114.65∗∗.∗p < .05. ∗∗p < .01.

Hypothesis H3 is tested by the results shown in Table 5. The vari-able pleasure was the most important determinant of customers’ overallsatisfaction; it had the highest standardized beta coefficient value of 0.61,t = 14.94, p < .001, with servicescape (standardized beta = 0.08, t = 1.91,p < .05), and service encounter (standardized beta = 0.07, t = 1.67, p < .05)following, in descending order of importance. However, arousal did notappear to have a positive relationship with satisfaction. Hence, these resultsprovide partial support for H3.

Despite having an imperfect measure of congruency, this study alsoattempted to examine customers’ perceived congruency—e.g., whether theservicescape theme matching the type of food served and whether the inte-rior design matching the exterior décor affect customers’ emotions (e.g.,pleasure, arousal). Table 6 presents the regression analysis for H4 and H5.H4 is supported in that customers’ pleasure levels increase when the ser-vicescape matches the food served, and the exterior look of the restaurantmatches the interior décor (standardized beta = 0.30, t = 20.93, p < .001).H5 is not supported in that perceived congruency did not reveal a positiverelationship to individual’s arousal.

Table 7 shows that the results of the interactive effect of perceivedcongruency and pleasure on individual satisfaction is positively related toindividual’s satisfaction (standardized beta = .22, t = 1.76, p < .001), hence

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


TABLE 6 Summary of Regression Analysis for Perceived Congruency Predicting Pleasure andArousal (N = 478)

Pleasure Arousal

Variable B SE B β B SE B β

Perceived Congruency 0.30 0.03 .41∗∗ 0.01 0.04 .01

Note. R2 = .17, F(1, 477) = 83.03∗∗ for predicting Pleasure; R2 = .01, F(1, 477) = .23 for predictingArousal.∗∗p < .01.

TABLE 7 Summary of Regression Analysis for the Interaction of PerceivedCongruency and Pleasure and the Interaction of Perceived Congruency andArousal Predicting Satisfaction (N = 478)

Satisfaction

Variable B SE B β

Perceived Congruency 0.19 0.09 .21∗

Pleasure 1.05 0.09 .77∗∗

Perceived Congruency × Pleasure 0.03 0.02 .22∗

Perceived Congruency 0.43 0.09 .45∗∗

Arousal 0.24 0.12 .23∗

Perceived Congruency × Arousal 0.03 0.02 1.37

Note. R2 = .49, F(3, 474) = 149.28∗∗ for Perceived Congruency × Pleasure (inter-action of Perceived Congruency and Pleasure predicting satisfaction); R2 = .13,F(3, 474) = 23.00∗∗ for Perceived Congruency × Arousal (interaction of PerceivedCongruency and Arousal predicting satisfaction).∗p < .05. ∗∗p < .01.

H6 is supported. H7 is not supported in that the interactive effect of per-ceived congruency and arousal on satisfaction is not statistically significant(standardized beta = .03, t = 1.37, p > .05).

DISCUSSION AND MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS

Customers patronize service organizations (e.g., retail shops, restaurants,hotels, spa, etc.) for an “experience.” That experience encompasses manycomponents within a service organization, including service encounter—the interaction between customers and the frontline employees, and theservicescape—the physical environment (Pine & Gilmore, 1998). As shownin prior research, consumers use the perception of overall goodness of fitwhen evaluating their satisfaction with various consumption experiences(e.g., Mattila & Wirtz, 2001). Consistent with this Gestalt framework (e.g.Bitner, 1992, Lin, 2004), our study findings indicate customers evaluate con-sumption experiences holistically. Specifically, the servicescape, the core

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


product (i.e., the food served), and service encounters (i.e., customer-employee interactions) are positively linked to feelings of pleasure and satis-faction (Mehrabian & Russell, 1974; Mattila & Wirtz, 2000; Wirtz et al., 2007).

Further, our findings suggest that perceived congruency between theservicescape and the core product has a positive impact on pleasure. Thisfinding provides additional support for the notion of Gestalt in understand-ing consumers’ responses to service environments (e.g., Holahan, 1982; Lin,2004; Oakes & North, 2008; Lin, 2010). In addition, previous research (Pine& Gilmore, 1998; Morin et al., 2007; Oakes & North, 2008; Lin, 2010) hasacknowledged the importance of the Gestalt theory in integrating differentatmospheric attributes in order to create a memorable experience for the cus-tomers. Our results also provide additional support for the interactive effectsof perceived congruency and pleasure on satisfaction. However, unlikeMattila and Wirtz (2006), our results failed to show a significant interac-tion effect between perceived congruency and arousal on satisfaction. Thesemixed findings might be partially explained by different operationalizationsfor perceived congruency across the two studies. Moreover, the interpre-tation of the term arousal might have created bias among the Taiwanesesubjects. This is one of the limitations of this study, and a more detaileddiscussion is provided in the limitations section.

Restaurant managers recognize that in today’s competitive restaurantbusiness it is no longer sufficient to offer good food or a nice atmosphereto customers. Today, customers are highly sophisticated and their evaluationof the overall dining experience encompasses not just the explicit visualcues of the servicescape or the overall ambience, but also the service staff’sinteraction with customers. Further, customer evaluations have become moremeticulous in that the matching of specific attributes also accounts for theiroverall dining satisfaction. Research presented in this article posits that theperceived congruency namely, (a) the matching of the store atmosphereand the type of food sold, and (b) the matching of the exterior look ofthe restaurant matches the interior décor or theme enhances individuals’pleasure and satisfaction.

These findings have important implications for restaurant managers.First, consumers evaluate consumption experiences in a holistic manner.Consequently, service operators have to make sure that the customer pos-itively evaluates both the physical environment and the service deliveryprocess. Second, careful consideration is needed in determining the appro-priate level of arousal elicited by the physical environmental attributes (e.g.,music, color, layout and design, etc.). Third, it is important to take intoaccount the perceived congruency effects, or the goodness of fit, betweenthe physical environment and the core product. Fourth, restaurant operatorscan adopt unusual or novel servicescape attributes to enhance customers’memorable experiences at the restaurant. Finally, considering the idea ofusing “services as the stage and goods as props to engage individual

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


customer in an inherently personal way” (Gilmore & Pine, 2002, p. 88),this particular restaurant sets a good example.

The results of this study also imply that this restaurant may set agood example for service providers, in that adopting an unusual mix ofservicescape attributes may not necessarily turn customers away. On thecontrary, service providers might be successful in adopting novel and uniqueenvironmental attributes to distinguish themselves from other restaurantsand focusing on providing quality food and good service to their customers.Yet, it is important to keep in mind the concept of Gestalt in that customersdo evaluate their overall experiences holistically, from the servicescape tothe service encounter, including the quality of food.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

This study has several limitations. First, the respondents’ cultural background(Taiwanese) might have influenced their interpretation of the term arousal,thus creating potential bias in this measure. Second, as it is true for all fieldstudies, this study sacrificed internal validity for the sake of external valid-ity. However, the results of this study can only be generalized to similarcasual dining restaurants in Taiwan with a similar customer mix. Third, arestaurant environment encompasses many attributes. Since this study tookplace in an actual restaurant setting, all the environmental attributes werefixed. For example, the color of the wall was grass-green; the results of thestudy should be generalized with caution. In addition, the measurement ofperceived congruency needs retooling. Future research is needed to fullycapture perceived congruency or “relevancy and expectancy” in differentservice settings. In order to examine congruency effects, this study imple-mented the Gestalt approach. Due to its field study design, this study did notmanipulate environmental attributes (e.g., color, music, etc.). Consequently,perceived congruency is measured as an overall match between the envi-ronment and the type of food served and whether the exterior look matchesthe interior decor. Hence, great care is needed in generalizing the Gestalteffects to specific servicescape attributes (e.g., does the music match theoverall theme or the type of cuisine served in the restaurant?).

There are additional limitations based on our methodology and proce-dures. First, the sample was a convenience sample. This restaurant was alsochosen to allow for a range of responses on perceived congruency scale.Second, in order to respect the local culture, we had to approach poten-tial respondents at the beginning of the meal (e.g., this way, they will waitat the end of their meal to complete the survey instrument before leavingthe restaurant). Generally, Taiwanese like to go in and out of the restau-rant quickly and efficiently. They normally would not linger around therestaurant (similar to this setting: casual dining) at the end of their meal.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


Had the researchers not solicited their co-operation at the beginning, theywould have left the restaurant immediately having finished their meal.

Both the servicescape and the service encounter play different rolesdepending on a service setting (Namasivayam & Lin, 2004), and therefore,future research should test our model in different service settings (e.g.,different types of retail shops, banks, different segments of the hospital-ity industry, and different culture or country). The notion of perceivedcongruency should also be further defined in future studies. For exam-ple, what constitutes “perceived congruency” besides the matching of theservicescape and the core product, food? Future research could investigateservicescape matching the style of service encounter (e.g., buffet self-servicevs. full-service luxury dining). In addition, other dependent variables suchas purchasing intention and customer loyalty can also be examined.

In conclusion, the results of the present study show that the abilityof the physical environment and service encounter to influence customers’emotions and evaluation along with the consideration of the concept ofGestalt and perceived congruency are apparent for restaurants. “The notionof ‘experience’ has been suggested as an alternative to commoditization”(Namasivayam & Lin, 2008, p. 56). A pleasant servicescape is only a singlecomponent in creating the consumption experience. As suggested by theGestalt theory, every aspect of the service organization (e.g., servicescape,service encounter, perceived congruency) together account for the overallexperience. Thus, restaurant operators should not neglect one or the other;all things will have an impact and will have to be taken into consideration forachieving the ultimate goal of creating memorable and satisfying experiencesfor their customers.

REFERENCES

Bellizzi, J. A., & Hite, R. E. (1992). Environment color, consumer feelings, andpurchase likelihood. Psychology and Marketing, 9, 347–363.

Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Berlyne, D. E. (1967). Arousal and reinforcement. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraskasymposium on motivation (pp. 1–110). Lincoln, NE: University of NebraskaPress.

Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Esthetics and psychobiology. New York, NY: Meredith.Bitner, M. J. (1990). Evaluating service encounters: The effect of physical surround-

ings and employee responses. Journal of Marketing, 54, 69–82.Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on

customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56 , 57–71.Bone, P. F. & Ellen, P. (1999). Scents in the marketplace: Explaining a fraction of

olfaction. Journal of Retailing, 75, 57–71.Bone, P. F., & Jantrania, S. (1992). Olfaction as cue for product quality. Marketing

Letters, 3, 289–296.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


Brislin, R. W., Lonner, W. J., & Thorndike, R. M. (1973). Cross-cultural researchmethods. New York, NY: Wiley.

Carmer, J. C., & Rouzer, D. L. (1974). Healthy functioning from the Gestaltperspective. The Counseling Psychologist, 4(4), 20–23.

Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. NewYork, NY: Putnam.

Donovan, R. J., & Rossiter, J. R. (1982). Store atmosphere: An environmentalpsychology approach. Journal of Retailing, 58, 34–57.

Dube, L., & Morin, S. (2001). Background music pleasure and store evaluation inten-sity effects and psychological mechanisms. Journal of Business Research, 54,107–113.

Feldman, L. A. (1995, July). Valence focus and arousal focus: Individual differencesin the structure of affective experience. Journal of Personality Social Psychology,69, 153–166.

Fitzsimmons, J. A., & Fitzsimmons, M. J. (2008). Service management: Operations,strategy, information technology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Fox, S. (2001). Emotional value: Creating strong bonds with your customers.Personnel Psychology, 54, 230–234.

Frijda, N. H. (1999). Emotions and hedonic experience. In D. Kahnman,E. Diener, and N. Schwartz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonicpsychology (pp. 190–210). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

Gilmore, J. H., & Pine, B. J. II. (2002). Differentiating hospitality operations viaexperiences: Why selling services is not enough. Cornell Hotel and RestaurantAdministration Quarterly, 43(3), 87–96.

Gwinner, K. P., Bitner, M. J., Brown, S. W., & Kumar, A. (2005). Service customizationthrough employee adaptiveness. Journal of Service Research, 8, 131–148.

Hambleton, R. K. (1993). Translating achievement tests for use in cross-nationalstudies. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 9, 57–68.

Hartline, M., Maxham, J. III, & McKee, D. (2000). Corridors of influence inthe dissemination of customer-oriented strategy to customer contact serviceemployees. Journal of Marketing, 64, 35–50.

Hennig-Thurau, T., Groth, M., Paul, M., & Gremer, D. (2006). Are all smilescreated equal? How emotional contagion and emotional labor affect servicerelationships. Journal of Marketing, 70, 58–73.

Hightower, R., Brady, M. K., & Baker, T. L. (2002). Investigating the role of thephysical environment in hedonic service consumption: An exploratory study ofsporting events. Journal of Business Research, 55, 697–707.

Holahan, C. (1982). Environmental psychology. New York, NY: Random House.Jang, S. C., & Namkung, Y. (2009). Perceived quality, emotions, and behavioral

intentions: Application of an extended Mehrabian-Russell model to restaurants.Journal of Business Research, 62, 451–460.

Kassarjian, H. H., & Robertson, T. S. (1981). Perspectives in consumer behavior.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Scott Foresman & Co.

Keillor, B. D., Lewison, D., Tomas, G., Hult, M., & Hauser, W. (2007). The serviceencounter in a multi-national context. Journal of Services Marketing, 21, 451–461.

Kelley, S. (1992). Developing customer orientation among service employees.Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 20, 27–36.

Kerlinger, F., & Lee, H. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research. Orlando, FL:Harcourt College Publisher.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


Kivela, J., Inbarkaran, R., & Reece, J. (2000). Consumer research in the restaurantenvironment. Part 3: Analysis, findings and conclusions. International Journalof Contemporary Hospitality Management, 12(1), 13–30.

Kotler, P. (1973). Atmospherics as a marketing tool. Journal of Retailing, 49, 48–64.Larsen, R. J., Diener, E. D., & Lucas, R. E. (2002). Emotion: Models, measures, and

individual differences. In R. G. Lord, R. J. Klimoski, & R. Kanfer (Eds.), Emotionsin the workplace (pp. 64–106). New York, NY: Jossy-Bass.

Lin, I. Y. (2004). Evaluating a servicescape: The effect of cognition and emotion.International Journal of Hospitality Management, 23, 163–178.

Lin, I. Y. (2010a). The combined effect of color and music on customer satisfactionin hotel bars. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management, 19(1), 22–37.

Lin, I. Y. (2010b). The interactive effect of Gestalt situations and arousal seekingtendency on customers’ emotional responses: Matching color and music tospecific servicescape. Journal of Services Marketing, 24(4), 294–304.

Mattila, A. S., & Enz, C. (2002). The role of emotions in service encounters. Journalof Service Research, 4, 268–277.

Mattila, A. S., & Wirtz, J. (2001). Congruency of scent and music as a driver ofin-store evaluations and behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77 , 273–289.

Mattila, A. S., & Wirtz, J. (2006). Arousal expectations and service evaluations.International Journal of Service Industry Management, 17 , 229–244.

Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology.Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Michleit, K. A., & Eroglu, S. A. (2000). Describing and measuring emotional responseto shopping experience. Journal of Business Research, 49, 101–111.

Michleit, K. A., & Mantel, S. P. (2001). Emotional response and shopping satisfactionmoderating effects of shopper attributions. Journal of Business Research, 54,97–106.

Milliman, R. E. (1986). The influence of background music on the behavior ofrestaurant patrons. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 286–289.

Mittal, B., & Lassar, W. (1996). The role of personalization in service encounters.Journal of Retailing, 72, 95–109.

Morin, S., Dube, L., & Chebat, J. C. (2007). The role of pleasant music servicescapes:A test of the dual model of environmental perception. Journal of Retailing, 83,115–130.

Morrison, M., & Beverland, M. (2003). In search of the right in-store music. BusinessHorizon, 46(6), 77–82.

Namasivayam, K., & Lin, I. Y. (2004). Accounting for temporality in servicescapeeffects on consumers’ service evaluations. Journal of Foodservice BusinessResearch, 7 , 5–22.

Namasivayam, K., & Lin, I. Y. (2008). Handbook of hospitality operations and IT.In P. Jones & A. Pizam (Eds.), The servicescape (pp. 43–62). Oxford, England:Butterworth-Heineman.

Namasivayam, K., & Mattila, A. S. (2007). Accounting for the joint effects of the ser-vicescape and service exchange on consumers’ satisfaction evaluations. Journalof Hospitality and Tourism Research, 31, 3–17.

Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.Oakes, S. (2007). Evaluating empirical research into music in advertising: A congruity

perspective. Journal of Advertising Research, 47 , 38–50.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


Oakes, S., & North, A. (2008). Reviewing congruity effects in the service environmentmusicscape. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 19, 63–82.

Ohman, A., Hamm, A., & Hugdahl, K. (2000). Cognition and the autonomic ner-vous system: Orienting, anticipating, and conditioning. In J. T. Cacioppo,L. G. Tessinary, & G. G. Berntson (Eds.). Handbook of psychophysiology (2nded., pp. 533–575). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Parish, J., Berry, L., & Lam, S. (2008). The effect of servicescape on service workers.Journal of Service Research, 10, 220–238.

Pine, J. II, & Gilmore, J. H. (1998, July/August). Welcome to the experienceeconomy. Harvard Business Review, 97–105.

Price, L., Arnould, E., & Deibler, S. (1995). Consumers’ emotional responses toservice encounters. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 6 ,34–63.

Reimer, A., & Kuehn, R. (2005). The impact of servicescape on quality perception.European Journal of Marketing, 39, 785–808.

Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk, L. L. (1978). Consumer behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.

Tombs, A., & McColl-Kennedy, J. R. (2003). Social-servicescape conceptual model.Marketing Theory, 3, 447–475.

Turley, L. W., & Milliman, R. E. (2000). Atmospheric effects on shopping behav-ior: A review of the experimental evidence. Journal of Business Research,49, 193–211.

Wakefield, K. L., & Blodgett, J. G. (1999). Customer response to intangible andtangible service factors. Psychology and Marketing, 16 , 51–68.

Weiss, H. M. (2002). Conceptual and empirical foundations for the study of affectat work. In R. G. Lord, R. J. Klimoski, & R. Kanfer (Eds.), Emotions in theworkplace (pp. 20–63). New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.

Wirtz, J., Mattila, A. S., & Tan, R. L. (2000). The moderating role of target-arousal onthe impact of affect on satisfaction: An examination in the context of serviceexperiences. Journal of Retailing, 76 , 347–365.

Wirtz, J., Mattila, A. S., & Tan, R. (2007). The role of arousal congruency in influ-encing consumers’ satisfaction evaluation and in-store behaviors. InternationalJournal of Service Industry Management, 18, 6–24.

APPENDIX

Scales and Measures

All scales were measured using a 7-point Likert-type scale anchored at1 (strongly disagree) and 7 (strongly agree). The following dependentvariables were employed:

Servicescape (modified from Hightower, Brady, & Baker, 2002):

1. The restaurant plays music that I like.2. The music is played at an appropriate volume.3. The restaurant lighting is appropriate.4. The temperature is comfortable.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


5. The exterior of the restaurant gives it an attractive character.6. The interior is decorated in an attractive fashion.7. The overall design is interesting.8. Overall, the layout makes it easy to get around.9. The layout makes it easy to go to the restrooms.

10. The layout makes it easy for servers to do their job.11. The interior wall and floor schemes are attractive.12. The interior wall and floor matches the overall theme of the restaurant.13. The color of the furniture matches the colors of the wall and floor.

Service Encounter (Adapted from Price, Arnould, and Deibler, 1995):

1. The server was efficient in handling my requests.2. The server was competent in doing his/her job.3. The server was thorough in performing the job.4. The server was willing to go out of her way to serve me as a customer.5. The server paid special attention to me.6. The server met my expectations.7. The server had a kind smile during our interaction.8. The server provided the service in a friendly manner.9. The server treated me nicely.

10. Overall, the quality of interaction with the server was high.

Perceived Congruency:

1. The fact that the food served in this restaurant matches the décor of therestaurant induces me to dine at this restaurant more often than in otherrestaurants.

2. The exterior look of this restaurant matches the interior décor/theme.

Pleasure/arousal: Measures for pleasure and arousal were taken from exist-ing scales for pleasure and arousal (Mehrabian and Russell, 1974), with sixitems measuring pleasure and six items measuring arousal.

How does this restaurant make you feel?

Pleasure:1. Bored 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Relaxed2. Despair 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Hopeful3. Unhappy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Happy4. Melancholic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Contented5. Annoyed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pleased6. Dissatisfied 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Satisfied

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3


Arousal:

1. Calm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Excited2. Unaroused 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Aroused3. Dull 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Jittery4. Relaxed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Stimulated5. Sleepy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Wide Awake6. Sluggish 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Wild

Satisfaction: Scales for satisfaction were adapted from (Hightower et al.,2002) 5-item scales.

1. I am happy with the experiences I have had in this restaurant.2. I have been satisfied with my experiences at this restaurant.3. I truly enjoy coming to this restaurant.4. I am elated with the experiences I have had in this restaurant.5. Going to this restaurant has been delightful.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

80.4

2.92

.22]

at 1

0:31

12

May

201

3

Restaurant Servicescape, Service Encounter

Documents

Transcript of Restaurant Servicescape, Service Encounter